If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I don't know about you, but in my experience paint (unless it has additives like metals, etc.) generally doesn't have a huge cost difference between colors. I know Mattel will do anything to save a cent or two, but if anything white would be cheaper as it tends to be a "base" color. But again, most paint costs the same one color to another.

This was an intentional choice.

A reasonable argument, but there is always the possibility that any material could become cheaper if it is over-ordered or available from someone who over-ordered it. THe extent to which Mattel has proven they will go to pinch a penny just a little harder has become apparent in the past several months.

THere's also the very real possibility that it would have taken MORE of the regular white to cover the blastic, so you have to figure in the potential cost there, as well.

In other words, it was an intentional move, but I still question the intentions.

"I will use this power for all the good that can be done, to work for peace, to encourage virtue, and above all, to preserve life in all its forms..." Superman

If Mattel really needed to differentiate the two "bright whites" used on Netossa and Frosta, then they could have given Netossa a "pearlescent" bright white while Frosta could have gotten a "matte/standard" bright white.

The mid-grey for Frosta just doesn't make any sense, especially when fans were so vocal about Mattel using bright white for BP She-Ra and for Frosta since the latter was first revealed!